SECTION A: Propositional Logic (25 marks)

Consider the following argument:

“We should be bothered about climate change only if it will seriously affect us during our lifetime or we, on our own, can do things to arrest it. Scientists predict (and we have no reason to believe otherwise) that the serious effects of climate change will be felt more than 100 years from now. If the serious effects of climate change will be felt more than 100 years from now, then climate change will not seriously affect us during our lifetime. And, it is only reasonable to suppose that nothing that we do on our own will have any impact on stopping climate change. So, we shouldn’t be bothered about climate change.”

In the context of this argument, you are required to do the following:

a) Assign a letter of the alphabet to each relevant simple statement in the argument. (4 marks)

b) Distinguish between and identify the final conclusion, the explicitly stated premises and the intermediate conclusions of the argument (if any). For any intermediate conclusion you identify, state the premises you infer this conclusion from, along with the valid standard argument form used in the inference. Also, state the premises and intermediate conclusions used in inferring the final conclusion and state the valid standard argument form (if any) used in the inference [Hint: See Example 5.6.2 in your textbook for guidance.] (17 marks)

c) Use standard argument forms to evaluate whether the argument is valid. (4 marks)

SECTION B: Inductive Arguments (10 marks)

Questions 2 and 3 contain inductive arguments. For each question, identify the arguments by stating the premises and the conclusion [NOTE: The conclusion might be implicit]. Then, explain which fact, if known, would make the inductive arguments contained therein stronger; and which fact, if known, would make the arguments weaker.

Question 2
‘Emma is generally in a happy mood at the end of a work day. It is 9pm now. Emma would be in a happy mood.’

(100 words max, 5 marks)

Question 3
‘80% of 5,000 Singaporeans surveyed state that the government was right to deny Ben Davis exemption from National Service to play Premier League football. So, the government decision was popular among Singaporeans.’
(100 words max, 5 marks)

SECTION C: Informal Fallacies (10 marks)
In the passages contained in Questions 4 – 8, an informal fallacy may have been committed. For each passage (argument), if it is fallacious, recognise the fallacy by naming it; if the passage is not fallacious, state so.
(2 marks each)

Question 4
‘My astrologer claims that climate change is a hoax. So, climate change isn’t happening.’

Question 5
‘Homosexuality is morally wrong because it can’t be right to have carnal relations with another person of the same sex.’

Question 6
‘I have no proof that my boyfriend cheats on me. So, he doesn’t.’

Question 7
‘Manchester City is a world-class football team. So, every Manchester City football player is world-class.’

Question 8
‘McDonald’s has delicious food as well as efficient and courteous customer service. Therefore, McDonald’s is better than KFC.’

SECTION D: Definitions (10 marks)
Questions 9 and 10 provide definitions of the word/phrase italicised in the question. For each definition, identify what you consider to be the biggest failing of the definition. If you consider the definition to be good, state so. Explain your answer.

Question 9
National Service is an institution that requires citizens of a nation state to serve the nation state.  (50 words max, 5 marks)

Question 10
Terrorism is the practice of using illegal violence against innocent people to achieve deviant political objectives.
(50 words max, 5 marks)

SECTION E: Evaluating and Writing Argumentative Essays (45 marks)
Question 11
Read the passage “End all immigration controls – They’re a sign we value money more than people.” This can be retrieved from
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/16/end-immigration controls-moneypeople-barriers. Answer the following questions.

a) In your own words, identify the final conclusion of the author’s central argument.  (20 words max, 5 marks)
b) In your own words, illustrate the structure of the argument (show how the author supports his final conclusion). Your response must include a brief evaluation of the quality of his reasons.  (50 words max, 10 marks)
c) Finally, develop a position of your own in support of or against [but, not both] the author’s conclusion. Then, defend that position with an argument. Your response should desirably (and, naturally) use your discussion in b. above as a basis. [NOTE: Your score for this part will reflect the quality of your argument; the quality of your writing; use of additional considerations (to the ones discussed in the original paper) relevant to your conclusion; and your reference to external sources.]
(400 words max, 30 marks)